Self rate after 7 years

Cindysphinx

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
A captain has asked me a question. She met a player who just moved to the area. At one time she was 4.0, and she was 3.5 seven years ago. She wants to self rate at 3.0.

Setting aside issues of sandbagging for the moment, can she join a 3.0 team?

If the answer is yes I will tell the captain that and then suggest absent some major physical catastrophe, it would be a bad idea to have her play 3.0.
 
Hopefully this player doesn't run into @Startzel

:D

In all seriousness, I believe she can't self-rate below 3.5 if that was her last computer rating
 
Last edited:
She will have to go through the questionnaire ... and as long as she wasn't a college player in last 20 years or high school starter in last 15 years she can indeed rate as a 3.0 IF that is the lowest level the questionnaire dictates.

Her previous rating will be long gone and will have no impact on her new rating whatsoever. think about it: what if a 5.0 left for 7 years and is now 50 years old, you don't expect that person to still be a 5.0 right?

And on your second point. It may not be a bad idea for her to start at 3.0 depending on a lot of things. 7 years is a long time, especially depending on age, condition, etc.

I had been 20+ years removed from a 4.0/4.5 rating (back in the visual ratings days) and then came back ... MUCH older and with some long-term injuries and really out of shape. Computer questionnaire said 2.5, I rated 3.0 and played one season where I started out losing (badly) and then started winning but not by much. I did get bumped at the end of that season (it was Fall so ended right as ratings came out) and that surprised a lot of people as I was not dominant.
 
Last edited:
Yes, that sounds right. I thought there was a limit in how low you could rate below your last rating, but I guess not.
 
OnTheLine said:
She will have to go through the questionnaire ... and as long as she wasn't a college player in last 20 years or high school starter in last 15 years she can indeed rate as a 3.0 IF that is the lowest level the questionnaire dictates.

Her previous rating will be long gone and will have no impact on her new rating whatsoever. think about it: what if a 5.0 left for 7 years and is now 50 years old, you don't expect that person to still be a 5.0 right?

And on your second point. It may not be a bad idea for her to start at 3.0 depending on a lot of things. 7 years is a long time, especially depending on age, condition, etc.

I had been 20+ years removed from a 4.0/4.5 rating (back in the visual ratings days) and then came back ... MUCH older and with some long-term injuries and really out of shape. Computer questionnaire said 2.5, I rated 3.0 and played one season where I started out losing (badly) and then started winning but not by much. I did get bumped at the end of that season (it was Fall so ended right as ratings came out) and that surprised a lot of people as I was not dominant.
Click to expand...
Rules state:

Players with expired ratings will not be allowed to self-rate at a lower level than their last valid NTRP rating level.

https://www.usta.com/content/dam/usta/pdfs/2017_regs_for_web.pdf
 
for the life of me I do not understand that line of thinking. If a captain needs to know what a given player's rating is (more/less) why doesn't she ask the said player to play two/three matches with players already on the team. Make the matches mean something, I don't know bottle of wine or some gift certificate so both parties play their best, and you will find out the rating immediately.
Isn't that entire questionnaire only for those that have no means to actually play a match against a known-ranked player to find out where they are ranking wise?
 
Cindysphinx said:
A captain has asked me a question. She met a player who just moved to the area. At one time she was 4.0, and she was 3.5 seven years ago. She wants to self rate at 3.0.

Setting aside issues of sandbagging for the moment, can she join a 3.0 team?

If the answer is yes I will tell the captain that and then suggest absent some major physical catastrophe, it would be a bad idea to have her play 3.0.
Click to expand...
As I understand it, she would need to self rate at 3.5 since that was her last valid computer rating. Despite it being 7 years ago, I don't think there is a statute of limitations on that.
She would then be able to appeal her 3.5 self-rate. Success of the appeal will depend on her age and any injury history.
 
Actually, I didn't have a computer rating did I? That was the old visual rating from those rating clinics back in the day ... right?
 
OnTheLine said:
Actually, I didn't have a computer rating did I? That was the old visual rating from those rating clinics back in the day ... right?
Click to expand...
Hmm I'm not sure, I'd have to look up the rule again and I'm too lazy... not sure if the 'floor' for self-rating is last valid computer rating, or just last valid rating of any kind. I'm sure someone more knowledgeable will chime in.
 
If you’ve ever played 4.0 at any point in your life, you will be bored to tears at 3.0 unless you are 70.

She should rate at 3.5 and avoid the lob queens and bunters.

3.5 is kind of the minimal level where tennis becomes somewhat how it is meant to be played.
 
You can appeal USTA by filling out questionaire and they will get back to you in a few weeks.
My last valid rating was 3.5c but I never played a match as a 3.5 because kids were born just as the 3.0 season was ending. I didn't play for about 4 years and then wated to join a 3.0 team after I move to ATL. From what I hear competition here is way tougher.

USTA granted me the appeal to play as a 3.0s
 
Dartagnan64 said:
If you’ve ever played 4.0 at any point in your life, you will be bored to tears at 3.0 unless you are 70.

She should rate at 3.5 and avoid the lob queens and bunters.

3.5 is kind of the minimal level where tennis becomes somewhat how it is meant to be played.
Click to expand...

I have not been bored at all. Big difference between 24 and 47 years old though. (and shot knees, began at least 50lbs overweight, but not any longer).
 
According to their guidelines, age is a factor. For example you stopped playing USTA in your 30's and took up the USTA game again in your 50's, there are maximum recommended levels for what you did when younger adjusted for what age you are now. According to their tables, I can self rate or appeal to a 3.5 now since I qualify as a Super Senior. Makes a lot more sense than saying I must self rate as when I was in my 30's. There should be an automatic adjustment based on current age.
 
As stated earlier in this thread, you can't self-rate lower than your last published NTRP rating. An old visual rating wouldn't qualify. Also the USTA database contains ratings no more than 20 years back, probably fewer, so if your last rating was 20+ years ago you can self-rate at whatever the questionnaire allows. But then you can immediately appeal that and wait for the outcome, I've seen a surprisingly high percentage granted.
 
S&V-not_dead_yet said:
That's where having a human to make a judgment call would make sense. The rule is there to prevent sandbagging but it's inflexible.
Click to expand...
That's what the appeals process is for. You have to initially self-rate at a minimum of your last valid level, but if you want to play lower, you can file a self-rating appeal and have actual people look at it and make a judgment call.
 
clearly neither the said player nor the captain is interested in rating that would correctly reflect the player's level. They are both interested in 'what is the lowest possible rating I can claim to not be DQ later on'.
 
jmnk said:
clearly neither the said player nor the captain is interested in rating that would correctly reflect the player's level. They are both interested in 'what is the lowest possible rating I can claim to not be DQ later on'.
Click to expand...
Hey, 3.0 Nationals is serious business...
finalpicsilly.jpg

This-is-serious-business.jpg
 
Anyone with any sort of athletic ability should start off at 3.5. So if you previously played tennis you should certainly self rate at 3.5 at the very least no matter how long your break away from the game or age is. A 3.0 is a beginner. I know the guideline says 2.0/2.5 but unless your hitting homerun forehands over the fence at rate > or = 3.5.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G928A using Tapatalk
 
Yes, I tend to agree. There used to be a viable 2.5 league level some years ago, but that doesn't exist around here anymore. It used to take beginners 1-2 years to be bumped to 3.0, so now all of the beginners have to start at 3.0. A player who was once a 4.0 doesn't belong in 3.0 unless she has suffered absent a horrific injury/health decline or is an octogenarian.
 
I had forgotten that your area had eliminated the 2.5 leagues ... that really does drastically change the composition of 3.0
 
OnTheLine said:
I had forgotten that your area had eliminated the 2.5 leagues ... that really does drastically change the composition of 3.0
Click to expand...

Exactly. Where I'm from no one rates at 2.5 They all start leagues as 3.0 equivalents. So 3.0 is just full of vertical tennis. My wife can't stand it. The 3.5's play more horizontally with better stroke mechanics and it's just a lot more fun
 
Dartagnan64 said:
Exactly. Where I'm from no one rates at 2.5 They all start leagues as 3.0 equivalents. So 3.0 is just full of vertical tennis. My wife can't stand it. The 3.5's play more horizontally with better stroke mechanics and it's just a lot more fun
Click to expand...

We have robust leagues of 2.5 women here which makes 3.0 quite different and 3.5 different again.

Not certain what you mean by vertical versus horizontal tennis exactly ... by vertical do you mean those soft high fluffy pseudo lobs that hit the service line? if so, that is a 2.5 thing around here and not a 3.0 thing.
 
OnTheLine said:
We have robust leagues of 2.5 women here which makes 3.0 quite different and 3.5 different again.

Not certain what you mean by vertical versus horizontal tennis exactly ... by vertical do you mean those soft high fluffy pseudo lobs that hit the service line? if so, that is a 2.5 thing around here and not a 3.0 thing.
Click to expand...

Yes vertical tennis is where vectors the ball travels in have more vertical force than horizontal. And gravity is the predominant force used to keep the ball in the court. Mixture of real lobs and moonballs and any flat ball is a mistake and spin is unheard of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
How can you self rate if you already have a computer rating?
Replies
27
Views
2K
S&V-not_dead_yet
S&V-not_dead_yet
Cindysphinx
The Unfixable Self-Rate Error
Replies
36
Views
4K
10sjunkie
1
K
Self-Under Rated...Any way to fix?
Replies
6
Views
946
spot
S
Cindysphinx
Self-rated player blowing away the opponents
Replies
45
Views
4K
JavierLW
J
Cindysphinx
Div. 3 player needs to self-rate
Replies
11
Views
2K
Cindysphinx
Cindysphinx
Back
Top